Citation Nr: 18155598
Decision Date: 12/04/18	Archive Date: 12/04/18

DOCKET NO. 18-18 563
DATE:	December 4, 2018
REMANDED
Entitlement to a rating in excess of 20 percent for degenerative changes of the lumbar spine is remanded.
Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for bursitis of the right hip is remanded.
Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for bursitis of the left hip is remanded.
REASONS FOR REMAND
The Veteran served on active duty in the U.S. Army from July 1991 to July 1994.  
This matter comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a November 2015 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office in St. Petersburg, Florida.
1.  Entitlement to a rating in excess of 20 percent for degenerative changes of the lumbar spine.
2.  Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for bursitis of the right hip.
3.  Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for bursitis of the left hip.
The Veteran most recently underwent VA hip and spine examinations in November 2015.  In his March 2018 substantive appeal, he requested new examinations, asserting that the existing reports did not accurately represent his level of impairment in terms of pain and limitation of function.  In view of his statements, additional examinations are warranted. 
This matter is REMANDED for the following actions:
1.  Arrange to have the Veteran scheduled for examinations of his hips and thoracolumbar spine.  If feasible, the examinations should be conducted by someone other than the examiner who conducted the examinations in November 2015.  The examiner should provide a full description of the Veteran’s functional impairments as they relate to the relevant rating criteria.
The examinations must include testing for pain on both active and passive motion, in weight bearing and non-weight bearing, and, if possible, with the range of the opposite undamaged joint.
The examiner must attempt to elicit information regarding functional loss due to flare-ups and repeated use over time.  If the Veteran suffers from such loss, the examiner should express the loss in terms of degrees of additional loss in range of motion (i.e., in addition to that observed clinically), if feasible, taking into account all of the evidence, including the Veteran’s competent statements with respect to the frequency, duration, characteristics, and severity of his limitations.
Governing law requires that if the Veteran is not exhibiting functional loss due to flare-ups and/or repeated use over time, examiners will nevertheless offer opinions with respect to functional loss based on estimates derived from information procured from relevant sources, including lay statements of the Veteran.  An examiner must do all that reasonably should be done to become informed before concluding that an opinion cannot be provided without resorting to speculation.
That said, if it is the examiner’s conclusion that he or she cannot feasibly provide the requested opinion(s), even considering all of the available evidence, it must be so stated, and the examiner must provide the reasons why offering such opinion(s) is not feasible.
2.  After completing the above, and any other development as may be indicated by any response received as a consequence of the actions taken in the preceding paragraph, the Veteran’s claims should be readjudicated based on the entirety of the evidence.  If any benefit sought remains denied, the Veteran and his representative should be issued a supplemental statement of the case.  An appropriate period of time should be allowed for response.
 
DAVID A. BRENNINGMEYER
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	R. R. Watkins, Counsel